Forum Topic

Changes to parking access control at Sainsbury's - warning !!

Parking access control at the big Sainsbury's has just changed from the barrier/ticket system to one using ANPR. The wording on the signage states "parking limited to 2 hours. No return within 1 hour." This implies that if you do your shop, get home, realise you have forgotten something and go back within the hour you will get a ticket. This does seem inherently unfair and was not an issue under the old system.I spoke to the duty manager and another couple of staff members about this yesterday. They agreed it was unfair but basically said "not my problem - we don't run the car park." No interest whatsoever in taking this up the management chain.

Simon Tranter ● 570d47 Comments

"That such a large proportion of vehicles travelled this way suggests local knowledge so calls into question that Fishers Lane was mainly used by through traffic i.e. a location in the area was a point of departure or arrival."The data came from satellite tracking provided by INRIX. Satellite navigation routing incorporates a good deal of "local knowledge".

Tom Pike ● 533d

Thanks for the helpful heads up Simon.  I think I may have inadvertently done just that recently when I returned to purchase a forgotten item!😢.  Good to know for the future.

Jackie Eastham ● 533d

There isn't regularly havoc on South Parade. It is unusual if it gets congested east of the Fishers Lane roundabout. There is endemic queueing on Acton Lane, often back to the 94 terminus.One point the data shared by Tom earlier which showed that there were twice as many cars going south on Fishers Lane than north. When travelling to destinations west going we would take Fishers Lane but coming back we would use Acton Lane. This was because the light phase entering CHR from Acton Lane was relatively short so it was quicker to join the High Road from Fishers Lane. On the way back, the lights were in your favour and Acton Lane moved more quickly eastbound so you didn't use Fishers Lane. That such a large proportion of vehicles travelled this way suggests local knowledge so calls into question that Fishers Lane was mainly used by through traffic i.e. a location in the area was a point of departure or arrival.If this is the case, it would explain why traffic isn't evaporating to the extent that queues on Acton Lane are disappearing.

Mark Evans ● 533d

What absolute tosh as always. Quicker, more direct same thing in any language. The closure of Fishers Lane has created havoc on South Parade. Absolutely astonishing at your posts sometimes , actually must times Professor Pike

Maggie Dodge ● 533d

Just more money grabbing. The UK is a dumping ground for anything that’s going to cost above and beyond of what the true value is.

C James ● 534d

Balanced and interesting post, as per the others you made on this thread, thanks Mark.

Mark Talbot ● 535d

I wasn't necessarily arguing for reopening just pointing out it was swings and roundabouts on the safety question (literally as the closure cuts traffic going past a playground).Bus running times are unlikely to be noticeably affected as the queues are intermittent and when they occur only effect one stop before the terminus for the 94 and rarely go back far enough along South Parade to affect the 272. Queues eastbound are even rarer. Therefore bus data does not contradict what people in the area are telling you is happening - namely that traffic queues stretching a long way down Acton Lane towards South Parade are a very regular occurrence.No road space has been reallocated to people walking and cycling here, in fact the queues often make it impossible to use Acton Lane on a bike because of the narrowness of the road. The data you have often quoted showing a drop in the number of vehicles is not evidence of success but of displacement. The measures taken appear to have caused the 'Actonisation' of parts of Acton Green and Bedford Park as people now tend to make journeys north rather than south.Reopening Fishers Lane may not be a silver bullet to reverse this as it may be that the queues we see are more a function of changes of traffic light phases at the Chiswick High Road/Acton Lane junction and it will just transfer part of the problem back to Fishers Lane. However, using incomplete data and then putting an imaginative spin on it to tell people who see something happening on a daily basis that it isn't happening isn't very credible.Ultimately closing Fishers Lane was a zero sum game in traffic and road safety terms and I'm not that bothered either way whether it reopens or not. The reality is that the decision on it is final because of the revenue the restrictions bring in and, despite what you say, there is no counter evidence that would be accepted by the authorities as grounds for their removal.

Mark Evans ● 535d

Such congestion was not evident in reported bus running times.  The opening up of a closed rat run in Poole was recently reversed under a Judicial Review. There was simply no evidence presented to support reopening the road against the statutory guidance of “presumption in favour of retaining any traffic schemes reallocating road space to people walking and cycling.”Both Hounslow and Ealing councils have collected evidence to support the closure of Fishers Lane in the first place, and therefore have no legal justification for opening it back up: in the absence of any counter evidence it would be illegal to reopen it, and we have yet to see any such evidence. Accounts of contrived journeys and personal experiences won’t change that. 

Tom Pike ● 536d

Traffic counts may have fallen due to the queues westbound back from Acton Lane which resulted in static traffic quite regularly in front of the nursery during the morning, meaning parents and carers coming from the north either had to take a detour to one of the zebras or weave through vehicles to get across the road. I don't recall ever seeing this happen pre-Covid but it was almost a daily occurrence after lockdown. That said, as far as I am aware, the extra traffic wasn't a factor in the nursery closing down.

Mark Evans ● 536d

Given that traffic counts on South Parade fell after the closure, as would have been expected as most traffic accessing Fishers Lane from the north was coming down Acton Lane or Bath Road, I don’t see why the closure was bad news for the nursery.

Tom Pike ● 536d

I'm not entirely convinced that safety was a particular consideration in making this restriction but if it was it was due to the playground right by the underpass. Although Belmont school may have benefitted, it was bad news for the nursery on South Parade which has now closed.As for walking under the bridge on the road, I'd really discourage it. I can understand why people started doing it during the pandemic and on the majority of occasions it is okay but regularly I see pedestrians going through just as a bus appears. The drivers don't make much allowance for people doing this so it seems often to be quite a shock to anyone getting caught this way.

Mark Evans ● 536d

It is all speculation. The closure of Fishers Lane is a little inconvenient but imo it makes the walk under the bridge and crossing the road safer and more pleasant. Safety for local schoolchildren was one consideration in determining the closure. The governing body of Belmont were fully in support of the closure and the headteacher wrote a letter to that end.

Stewart Jones ● 536d

Andrew, point taken, but accessing Sainsburys from the north via Fishers Lane definitely added traffic to South Parade.The Steer report showed most traffic using Fishers Lane was through traffic by your reasonable definition. It also showed that after the closure both local and through trips became slightly more direct. Fishers Lane was used on the whole because it was a quicker rather than a more direct route.

Tom Pike ● 536d

All this speculation about how many cars used Fishers Lane. Where they came from , where they were going . Of course Mr Robinson like all cycle lobbyists thinks he knows it all.Some people moan about how congested it used to be which just proves it was a used and needed route. I never found it to be a problem but each to his own experience.  It’s a mistake to close a road to vehicles but allow buses. In my opinion. So I’d say the sensible option is to open it. Let the cyclists make the detour if they don’t want to use it unless it’s car free.

Maggie Dodge ● 536d

"I wouldn’t speculate whether the majority of traffic going through Fishers Lane underpass originated from or terminated within the area bounded by TGT/CHR/Acton Lane/South Parade "Figures from March 2020 survey before closure showed that ~4400 vehicles turned from South Parade onto Fishers Lane (2800 from east, 1600 from west) and 2000 the other direction (~1000 each to east and west).I think it is safe to say that there weren't over 2200 cars within the area you mentioned that used Fishers Lane to get to and from the area and the majority of traffic that used Fishers Lane did NOT come from the area you reference.  There are only about 100-200 parking places on the streets to start with.

Michael Robinson ● 536d

Tom, I used to use Fishers Lane to get to Sainsbury’s car park, and it was certainly quicker than going via TGT or via Acton Lane.I wouldn’t speculate whether the majority of traffic going through Fishers Lane underpass originated from or terminated within the area bounded by TGT/CHR/Acton Lane/South Parade but clearly some did, so removing the Fishers Lane rat-run would have caused this traffic that previously used this route to now use CHR or South Parade. Perhaps some of it evaporated but I can’t believe it all did.That said, I don’t have any strong objections to this route being closed … maybe it’s for the better good (and I also know plenty of people on this forum will disagree cue the usual suspects …)

Andrew Jones ● 536d

"The congestion referred to on CHR would be less with Fishers Lane open as many cars previously using Fishers Lane will now go down TGT leading to the congestion referred to on CHR."Mark, it is indeed a remarkable property of Fishers Lane that any cars driving along it contributed neither to traffic on South Parade nor Chiswick High Road. This is not the case for traffic along Turnham Green Terrace, as you correctly point out.This has never been properly explained, but this property of Fishers Lane is a consistent belief of those advocating reopening it.

Tom Pike ● 536d

I would never have any occasion to be in a car near the junction of Fishers Lane and Chiswick Common Road so this route isn't going to provide me any benefit. In the situation I am describing, Chiswick High Road is congested westbound so, if Fishers Lane was reopened queues would likely stretch back to the junction with Belmont Road meaning that people would still take that route. There might be some reduction of the queues on Acton Lane but it wouldn't necessarily be enough to make the TGT — South Parade — Acton Lane route to go westbound quicker. In fact you may end up encouraging more drivers to cut through Sainsbury's having approached through Fishers Lane.

Andrew OSullivan ● 536d

Perhaps people saw my post of 31/10/23 12:33:00 above:

Will Watson ● 537d

Firstly - starting at say the junction of Fishers Lane and Chiswick Common Road with the bridge underpass in sight and Esmond Road just the other side of it; into Belmont Rd, past the primary school (which would never have been passed if Fishers Lane was open fully), nip right through Sainsburys car park to Acton Lane and round to South Parade to bottom of Esmond Road. Going through Sainsbury's avoids the right turn onto CHR, zebra crossing and queue at lights followed by right turn into Acton Lane and so way quicker which I would call a specific advantage. I've followed people doing the very same route and have little doubt all that do would not have done so with Fisher's Lane open.Secondly - the congestion referred to on CHR would be less with Fishers Lane open as many cars previously using Fishers Lane will now go down TGT leading to the congestion referred to on CHR.

Mark Talbot ● 537d

I live north of South Parade and I can't see how driving through Sainsbury's would deliver any specific advantage to me since Fishers Lane shut. The problem I think is occurring is that people progressing west on Chiswick High Road heading to Chiswick Roundabout and stuck east of the junction with Turnham Green Terrace, either through local knowledge or by SatNav are using it as way of leapfrogging the congestion.  It's not certain whether reopening Fishers Lane would solve this particular problem.

Andrew OSullivan ● 537d

Driving through Sainsbury's has obviously become more prevalent for many who live north of South Parade since Fisher's Lane was closed. It's a great route in the circumstances as I have posted on the "Reopen Fishers Lane for heavens sake" thread. But that's the problem with LTNs - they cause queues and in South London have been shown to displace more traffic onto school roads.

Mark Talbot ● 538d

The other evening I was walking up Windmill Road towards Chiswick Back Common when I noticed quite a few cars coming up the same way and turning left which stuck me as unusual as the road is normally very quiet. The High Road was not moving westbound. It only occurred to me a few days later when I was cycling along Belmont Road and saw that it was unusually busy that some of these vehicles may be cutting through Sainsbury's car park to leap frog the queues.  As a test I was going to activate Waze on my phone if I saw queueing traffic westbound on CHR to see if it was diverting people this way. If somebody else is in the vicinity i.e. east of TGT and sets Chiswick Roundabout as a destination, it would be interesting to see what route is given.

Andrew OSullivan ● 538d

Since when was keeping traffic flowing of any interest to you Paul. But ILike your thinking let’s make it happen big boy

Maggie Dodge ● 567d

They should make Chiswick Road two way again as well. Reversing Ruth Cadbury's decision to make it a LTN back in 2003. Then hard-working people could avoid the bus gate and the lights at Acton Lane and go all the way through to Thornton Avenue and Chiswick High Road via Sainsbury's car park and Chiswick Common Road with no hassle whatsoever. Amazed the local Councillors haven't thought of this opportunity to make life easier for drivers to be honest.

Paul Campbell ● 567d

Must be some LTNs nearby that they could use?

Andrew Jones ● 567d

Might be better to move the 4x4s onto the Back Common. Since Padel became a thing, Chiswick Common Road particularly by Eliott Road has become almost unnavigable in the evenings. Where would the travellers go though?

Mark Evans ● 567d

Maybe we could have a Chiswick Formula 1 event - that would soon cover up those pesky multicoloured non-crossings.

Andrew Jones ● 567d

Quite so Paul.Another option to increase traffic flow, bearing in mind the number of 4x4s in Chiswick, would be to create an off-road "green lane" across the Back Common.

Will Watson ● 567d

Will, it is clear from a quick glance at that map that the right answer here is to reopen Chiswick Common Road and Thornton Avenue so that drivers can extend that route to avoid the lights at Turnham Green Terrace and Chiswick High Road. It's really the only sensible thing to do to keep traffic flowing and flowing and flowing.

Paul Campbell ● 567d

Yeah more LTNs, just like CPZ introduce one and there’s a knock on effect. Not clever

Maggie Dodge ● 567d

I look forward to the demands for more LTNs.

Will Watson ● 567d

They probably ultimately have their eyes on the car park for development so wouldn't sell the spaces.One thing that may be of concern is that Google Maps/Waze may start to identify this as a route to circumvent queues on Chiswick High Road now that the barrier has gone.

Mark Evans ● 567d

I think someone used to patrol at night and issue tickets because, when the recycling facility was there we went in late on a Sunday to drop off some stuff and a man in hi-viz approached us and said we weren't allowed to park. Sadly, he will have probably have lost his job.The car park usage has dropped significantly since Acton Lane became so congested so Europarks must believe this will boost revenue as well as cut their costs. I'm surprised they haven't taken the opportunity to sell parking spaces to all the people moving into the new developments.

Anita Blake ● 568d

Simon makes a good point of someone returning after a previous shop but broadly speaking this is good news. You no longer have to shop at Sainsbury's to use this car park and that means more time to shop on the High Road. In practice this had been the case before hand because they rarely lowered the barriers on exit but most people probably did get parking validation just in case.However, the signs say that you just have 10 minutes outside Sainsbury's trading hours. I don't know if people used the car park at night when going out in Chiswick but this would no longer be possible now.

Mark Evans ● 568d

Hope you’re loving wherever you moved to Mike. Have you ever been back to W4?I know so many people near my daughters in Surrey, who are ex Chiswick and they hate going back

Maggie Dodge ● 568d

Andrew in the scheme of things 300 spaces as the main car park is little in my eyes.  Why do I post because I can, just like you .

Maggie Dodge ● 568d

Despite having moved away from W4 over a year ago, I do enjoy dipping into the forum every now and then.Never change, Maggie Dodge, never change.

Mike Firth ● 569d

A little car park? Are we talking about the same car park? The one near Chiswick Park Tube station? The one with about 300 spaces for cars in it?If you don't care any more why do you post about it then?

Andrew Jones ● 569d

I hardly think the little Sainsbury’s car park is considered a magnet,  it’s just a car park, until someone finds a way to convert it to a market or something similar😂 . Not shopping locally enables me to not really care any more 😉

Maggie Dodge ● 569d

I don't think it's unreasonable to expect someone to buy something to use a supermarket car park either, but what is being put into place is better for car drivers as long as they stick to the rules.The limit currently is 2 hours isn't it? That's what it was before. The limit for parking without any spend used to be 30 minutes, and it's now 2 hours.Using ANPR to log cars going into and out of the car park means that you don't have to worry about losing your ticket and you don't have to get your paper ticket validated at a check out (or at customer services if you are using self service check out).It's win, win, win for car drivers, the evil cycle lobby must be really pissed off about this magnet for cars making it more attractive for cars to come into Chiswick suddenly appearing.

Andrew Jones ● 569d

I don’t think it’s unreasonable to expect you to buy something in order to use a supermarket car park. Making it easy to get a fine is very different

Maggie Dodge ● 569d

Morrisons  Brentord. £5 spend for free parking

Iris Hill ● 569d

Think Morrisons is no return after 3 hours free, no minimum spend.

Janice Evans ● 570d

Absolutely! You can park in the car park for free for two hours without having to meet the minimum spend in Sainsbury’s any more.

Andrew Jones ● 570d

Chiswick just keeps getting better 👍

Maggie Dodge ● 570d

Rather than berating people scraping by on little more than the minimum wage, why not try 'taking this up the management chain' yourself? Here's the CEO's email address: simon.roberts@sainsburys.co.uk

Mike Smith ● 570d